|
Post by argonbalt on Oct 12, 2016 20:09:27 GMT
So i was just thinking on the whole turret creation/specialisation that is badly needed in the design, and that got me thinking. Shouldn't guns have the ability to fire more than one munition? In real life everything from "small" 20mm machine cannons to much larger 60+ guns usually have at least two or three different rounds of ammunition. This goes for both projectile and explosive customisation. This in general would be a big boon to all Coil/Rail/Conventional K-E guns, imagine, lighter fragmentation shots for radiators and drones, higher explosive payload high velocity rounds for laser sniping, incendiary penetrators for taking care of humans and fuel tanks. Naturally i realise that Q is working full time in regards to fixing stuff and reconciling the various technical bugs, but when a ship can often have 300000+ rounds of munition, wouldn't it make sense to load some different belts into different ammo drums and switch to what would be ideal? As long as the round does not burst the barrel and fits inside, it should fire!
Oh also STRUTS SWEET SWEET STRUTS FOR EXTERNALLY MOUNTING THESE BAD BOYS!
|
|
|
Post by RA2lover on Oct 12, 2016 21:23:52 GMT
All of the ammunittion types would need to have consistent muzzle velocities (assuming they're fired from the same belt) so the gun can actually track targets. This is pretty difficult to achieve while still having different target effects.
|
|
|
Post by argonbalt on Oct 13, 2016 3:08:21 GMT
All of the ammunittion types would need to have consistent muzzle velocities (assuming they're fired from the same belt) so the gun can actually track targets. This is pretty difficult to achieve while still having different target effects. Wouldn't it just be a matter of balancing weight? as long as they weigh the same they sould have the same Exit velocity right?
|
|
|
Post by ross128 on Oct 13, 2016 3:28:04 GMT
I think it would be a simple matter to tell the targeting computer what is currently loaded so it could adjust accordingly.
Of course, getting it to work in-game is likely to be much more difficult than getting it to work IRL (IRL, each bin would just need a chip in it that tells the computer "I have this ammo!").
|
|
|
Post by wafflestoo on Oct 13, 2016 5:07:44 GMT
All of the ammunittion types would need to have consistent muzzle velocities (assuming they're fired from the same belt) so the gun can actually track targets. This is pretty difficult to achieve while still having different target effects. I think argonbalt was thinking of selectable ammunition types (like we have in the M2 Bradley) and not mixed ammo belts.
|
|
|
Post by zuthal on Oct 13, 2016 5:20:44 GMT
For mixed belts, you could also allow setting used energy (railguns and coilguns) or propellant mass individually for each shell type, in order to be able to fine-tune the muzzle velocity along with the mass.
|
|
|
Post by argonbalt on Oct 13, 2016 18:59:32 GMT
All of the ammunittion types would need to have consistent muzzle velocities (assuming they're fired from the same belt) so the gun can actually track targets. This is pretty difficult to achieve while still having different target effects. I think argonbalt was thinking of selectable ammunition types (like we have in the M2 Bradley) and not mixed ammo belts. Yeah manual selection would be the norm, with in battle switching based on situational happenstance, I think we can all agree it would be cheaper and lighter to simply mount one gun that could shoot the whipple bumpers, then switch belts and perforate the hull, then it is to mount two guns with both jobs. Posted by zuthal13 hours ago For mixed belts, you could also allow setting used energy (railguns and coilguns) or propellant mass individually for each shell type, in order to be able to fine-tune the muzzle velocity along with the mass. This is also a good idea, more in line with WWII type aircraft belts, hypothetically you could load FRAG/PENTRTR/HE,INC/TRCR as a mix, so that if they landed in sequence you would not have to manually switch, and you could still go Outer whipple remover-dense core penetrator-explosion for the soft innards-Tracer to see were it all went. I mean look at this variety in the Hispano, it's not like the pilots had to run algorithms for exit velocity every time they shot a burst from a belt with like 5+ types of ammo. Attachment Deleted
|
|
|
Post by zuthal on Oct 14, 2016 10:07:25 GMT
Indeed, and since we do not have to contend with an atmosphere messing things up, we also do not have to worry about different shells having different ballistic performance.
|
|
|
Post by cuddlefish on Oct 14, 2016 13:29:05 GMT
To be fair, though - in aerial combat (particularly before radar-assisted gunnery) the general range of fire for these mixes was a few hundred yards at most - differences in travel time would still matter, but not nearly as much, particularly given there are so many other confounding factors. In space? The distance is many kilometers or tens of kilometers - so even small differences will add up.
|
|
|
Post by argonbalt on Oct 14, 2016 16:34:06 GMT
To be fair, though - in aerial combat (particularly before radar-assisted gunnery) the general range of fire for these mixes was a few hundred yards at most - differences in travel time would still matter, but not nearly as much, particularly given there are so many other confounding factors. In space? The distance is many kilometers or tens of kilometers - so even small differences will add up. true, but i still feel this would most likely come down to weight approximation, without atmosphere the majority of ballistics comes down to in the barrel type factors. Maybe i am simplifying this, but as long as exit velocity is equalised, and it does not explode the barrel from a pressure gradient, shouldn't they fly the same?
|
|
|
Post by zuthal on Oct 14, 2016 16:36:33 GMT
To be fair, though - in aerial combat (particularly before radar-assisted gunnery) the general range of fire for these mixes was a few hundred yards at most - differences in travel time would still matter, but not nearly as much, particularly given there are so many other confounding factors. In space? The distance is many kilometers or tens of kilometers - so even small differences will add up. true, but i still feel this would most likely come down to weight approximation, without atmosphere the majority of ballistics comes down to in the barrel type factors. Maybe i am simplifying this, but as long as exit velocity is equalised, and it does not explode the barrel from a pressure gradient, shouldn't they fly the same? In space, without any atmosphere confounding things? Yes, all projectiles fired on the same vector, from the same place, with the same velocity, will follow the same trajectory.
|
|
|
Post by argonbalt on Oct 14, 2016 16:43:16 GMT
true, but i still feel this would most likely come down to weight approximation, without atmosphere the majority of ballistics comes down to in the barrel type factors. Maybe i am simplifying this, but as long as exit velocity is equalised, and it does not explode the barrel from a pressure gradient, shouldn't they fly the same? In space, without any atmosphere confounding things? Yes, all projectiles fired on the same vector, from the same place, with the same velocity, will follow the same trajectory. if that is the case then i suppose you could also simply adjust powder levels instead, with lighter rounds needing less, and heavier needing more, the issue then becomes mainly one of storage and loading, with mixed belts requiring drums to be as long as the longest shot, and the only factor outside of that i can think of that needs to be equalised is calibre, so that it meshes with the barrel properly. On a side note, is smooth bore the ideal in space? rifling's spin is great for cutting atmosphere out of the way, but is the gyroscopic spin effect still needed in space?
|
|
Kahl'Zun
New Member
King of all cardboard
Posts: 19
|
Post by Kahl'Zun on Oct 14, 2016 22:18:54 GMT
One type of ammo I was thinking would be cool would be essentially a chain-shot, where the projectile uncoils into a cable after firing. Better hit chance, reduced penetration, yada yada. I did the math, and a 10kg mass uncoils into a 1cm cable that's ~16.5m long, and a 1 inch cable that's ~2.5m long.
|
|
|
Post by argonbalt on Oct 15, 2016 0:34:21 GMT
One type of ammo I was thinking would be cool would be essentially a chain-shot, where the projectile uncoils into a cable after firing. Better hit chance, reduced penetration, yada yada. I did the math, and a 10kg mass uncoils into a 1cm cable that's ~16.5m long, and a 1 inch cable that's ~2.5m long. NOW WE ARE COOKING! Finally after five hundred years of technological development we can return to that heavy bit what cuts em in alf when u make shoot. here regard my prototype: Attachment DeletedSeriously though this is an interesting idea, kill fans were considers as part of the star wars as a relatively simple idea that just works, distribute the impact over as much area as possible.
|
|
Kahl'Zun
New Member
King of all cardboard
Posts: 19
|
Post by Kahl'Zun on Oct 16, 2016 2:16:05 GMT
if the cable is strong enough, you could actually damage the side of the ship facing away from you as the cable would wrap around the ship
|
|